Options
Grading Discrepancies, Throwing in the Towel - and why I collect Modern Bullion Coins
jmski52
Posts: 22,382 ✭✭✭✭✭
When I first joined the forum, I engaged in various debates over "classic coins" vs. Modern Bullion. I loved to make the point that Modern Bullion coins have not only artistic appeal but investment potential. The opposing opinions always focused on how Modern Bullion aren't "really" coins, have no history, have tired or weak designs, never circulated, yada, yada, yada.
The debate is now over, as far as I'm concerned. The verdict is in.
I just received my final batch of Large Cents back from grading, and I'm not really sure what to think. Over the years, I've tried to carefully pick coins on the basis of eye appeal + some degree of pedigree or prior grading in my attempt to acquire nice pieces that are legit and original.
Two of these coins are very nice coins, but I suspected that they wouldn't grade, and they didn't. (One of them has a light scratch but I bought it anyway because its just a beautiful example. The other was one of my first high grade purchases on the learning curve and it's probably been cleaned years ago.)
Five more of them came back rated as "genuine". This concerns me because ALL 5 of them came with the labels from previously being graded by top tier tpgs, and some of them had auction pedigrees to boot. One of them is supposedly CC#1 in its variety.
Lastly, one of the coins came back MS64BN, and the previous label (from the very same tpg) was MS64RB which drops the theoretical value by exactly 50% per the Price Guide.
Thankfully, the other 30 or so Large Cents that I submitted made it through grading with flying colors. Make no mistake about it though, I can't have much confidence in spending a lot of time & money over years and years to find that the documentation and expense means virtually nothing now.
Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed owning some nice coins and I still can't believe that I ended up with a reasonably nice collection as far as I've taken it. However, I'm probably done with this pursuit as far as building a nice collection of "classic" coins. It's too punishing financially.
The debate is now over, as far as I'm concerned. The verdict is in.
I just received my final batch of Large Cents back from grading, and I'm not really sure what to think. Over the years, I've tried to carefully pick coins on the basis of eye appeal + some degree of pedigree or prior grading in my attempt to acquire nice pieces that are legit and original.
Two of these coins are very nice coins, but I suspected that they wouldn't grade, and they didn't. (One of them has a light scratch but I bought it anyway because its just a beautiful example. The other was one of my first high grade purchases on the learning curve and it's probably been cleaned years ago.)
Five more of them came back rated as "genuine". This concerns me because ALL 5 of them came with the labels from previously being graded by top tier tpgs, and some of them had auction pedigrees to boot. One of them is supposedly CC#1 in its variety.
Lastly, one of the coins came back MS64BN, and the previous label (from the very same tpg) was MS64RB which drops the theoretical value by exactly 50% per the Price Guide.
Thankfully, the other 30 or so Large Cents that I submitted made it through grading with flying colors. Make no mistake about it though, I can't have much confidence in spending a lot of time & money over years and years to find that the documentation and expense means virtually nothing now.
Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed owning some nice coins and I still can't believe that I ended up with a reasonably nice collection as far as I've taken it. However, I'm probably done with this pursuit as far as building a nice collection of "classic" coins. It's too punishing financially.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
I knew it would happen.
I knew it would happen.
0
Comments
Unless you're a dealer, coin collecting is a hobby.
<< <i>Unless you're a dealer, coin collecting is a hobby. >>
Not true at all.
A lot of us enjoy the hobby immensley but also want to believe that our collections are potentialy appreciating in value.
When these hopes get dashed or dented, especially after many years of spending real money on the collection, it's dissapointing.
Click on this link to see my ebay listings.
It seems like the 5 that were previously graded but now came back as genuine might not have changed. Maybe what changed is the grading standards or even the luck, maybe if sent back they could get back the grades they had before.
I get more bummed out when I see that my coin really did change. Like red copper varieties that I pulled from a roll so I know there was no chemical or reason and they were stored with other coins that stayed the same but then some coin that I felt was pristine gets a spot in the slab or changes in color. I know that after time they get more stable but the few coins that I loved that changed really bummed me out.
I think it's a similar feeling and makes me more eager to have a super RB instead of a super red copper coin because the changes will not be so upsetting.
You are also making the assumption that the first grade that they received was the "right" grade and that the coins have not changed over time. Not really surprised that an MS64RD could go to a MS64BN. I wouldn't be so quick to place blame on the TPG's if you are in the habit of cracking out coins and then try to reholder them expecting the exact same result after one submission.
Latin American Collection
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Well, I agree with you and that's what I've been doing since about 1986 when I started collecting them. I very much prefer them raw and stored in 2x2s. I like to admire raw Large Cents up close & personal, but eventually you have to slab them if you intend to liquidate. I decided to have them graded now because time is creeping up on that milestone.
Not really surprised that an MS64RD could go to a MS64BN. I wouldn't be so quick to place blame on the TPG's if you are in the habit of cracking out coins and then try to reholder them expecting the exact same result after one submission.
Hmmm. This is the first and only time that I've had the coins in my Large Cent collection graded. Not a habit, and not my style to try and chisel the grading system. Since I bought them all raw, it does puzzle me why anyone would go through the exercise of cracking out an MS64RD Large Cent in the first place. Can you think of a good reason? I can't, really.
The same thing applies to the 5 coins that came back "genuine". Somebody did crack them out and then saved the labels. Somebody saved the auction flip inserts as well. One of them had been graded by Del Bland. One that was previously graded, is now considered a planchet flaw, but not graded. What's that about?
If this sounds like a complaint maybe it is, but it would also be good to know and understand what just happened. The coins were raw, but they weren't bought in a vacuum.
But really, who in their right mind would leave 150 year-old coins that were previously graded MS64 by a top tier tpg in a slab that says "genuine"?
I knew it would happen.
Just as an example the center example below was formally in a RB holder and the dealer who won it at auction cracked it to upgrade.
Lost the designation as it's now a majorly mint red so-called BN.
1837 George A. Jarvis Tea & Wine Dealer, New York, HT-283 / Low-122, R-2.
Ex: Leidman, Dice/Hicks collections.
Ex: Gross, Sebring collections.
Ex. Robert Schonwalter, Herbert Oeschner, Donald Miller, George T. Tilden collections.
1. A large cent that is high in the condition census (the OP stated that one is CC #1) does not really need to be slabbed. It would have been photographed by Noyes (presumably) and its pedigree will be sufficient for buyers to rely on.
2. There are simply too many instances of early coppers not straight grading when market standards are applied to be all that upset by this. Experienced collectors of early coppers and colonials know that market graders use a 'lowest common denominator' approach when grading; this doesn't work very well in many instances. This is a key reason why EAC grading hasn't been run out of the early copper marketplace by now.
3. All things considered, I think that your grading experiment went rather well. Coins that did not market grade this time can simply be sold to EACers if you don't want to try the market grading game again.
4. It would be instructive to post images of the coins that did not receive a straight grade, together with EAC grade, for discussion.
5. If you purchased some coins as 'choice' examples, how did they do? Were their EAC grades in line with their recent TPG grades?
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
'dude
Dang, I really do like coins.
I knew it would happen.
For a market consensus I would expect any of these to qualify (2/2, 2/3, 3/4, 3/5, 4/7, 6/10). So if you've only had one submission, there is no agreement. And if it comes back different the 2nd time, you need a 3rd submission. I've had coins go in that had no agreement after 3 to 4 submissions (real examples of 63,64,65 on an 1838-0 dime and then a 64, BB-PCGS, BB-NGC, 66 on a common date $10 Lib). I've also had a killer 1856-0 MS64 ogh quarter that I cracked out 4 times figuring the odds were high it would upgrade. After 4 more MS64's I finally gave up (the next guy got the 65). But the fact that it went 64 - 5 times, all on crackouts said the coin was very strong for the grade. Today that would have qualified for 64+. Another time I had a really nice MS63ish 1841 half that I felt had a decent 64 shot. But it also had some faint pin-scratches hidden under the eagle's wing nook. That coin never had full agreement as it came back 62, BB, 63, BB, 63. After getting it back to a 63 that was enough. I would probably concede that a CAC green sticker could qualify as a grading event where a one submission coin that then stickers is probably the correct grade.
Grading is a "sequence of events" that narrows down the grade. And if you're buying coins off the market after a sequence of events, you can be pretty sure the odds favor it has ended up in the highest grade it ever achieved. Grading service accuracy or repeatability is only in the 55-75% range (I personally think it's 60-65%). My "worst" submission ever came at NGC in 2002 when I sent in 6-8 raw gem seated and bust coins out of the Vermeulle sale. Only 2 of them came back as I was expecting. The others came back 1-2 grades lower. I was buried. The MS66++ 1882 half I paid strong 66 money for came back MS65. That was insane. I had no choice but to send back all those coins for another look. This time around they all went up a grade, and the 1882 half went up 2 grades to MS67....end of burial. Anyone who thinks grading isn't all over the map based on numerous factors just hasn't done it enough. Another time a dealer friend of mine showed me a blue gem 1893 quarter that had walked in off the street. It had been held by the family since day of issue with paperwork to prove it. That coin "only" came back MS65 the first time. While I wanted to buy that coin from the dealer for MS65 money and make $3K down the road, I knew it was nicer. I resubmitted the coin again for him where it came back MS66. It was then purchased and I made $700 on a sale price of $6,500. One has to figure than on any submission the odds are decent for 20% of the coins to come back low, 20% high, and 60% about right on. If the TPG's are really sharp on those days, you could go 10-80-10. Don't try to equate any of my experiences to modern submissions of 69/70 coins....that's a different animal.
Personally, I think collectors should gain experience in both selling coins and getting them graded them over the years. And looking for upgradeable coins is one way to try to ensure you do no worse than break even for your efforts. While I cracked out a ton of coins from 1988-2008, I also got an awakening from CAC when my batch of 40 "keepers" was evaluated. I wish I had gotten an 80% rate. I was quite surprised at what "fairly minor issues" (imo) disqualified the coins from stickering. Many of those were gem NGC seated coins. While I graded them B's, CAC felt they were C or C+. At that time the distinction was a 10-15% difference in price from PCGS. But after the NGC fallout from 2009 those price differences are now 20-40%.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
As I see it grading from the top TPG services have changings standards.
The policies on grading often confuses me and other dealers.
Just as an example if a coin is a 66 it should be a 66 every time. This is not the case and examples plentiful.
Cracking out coins to enjoy them raw is not a free ride.
I knew it would happen.
Would also note that not only were your submission results better than you think, but who is to say PCGS got them all right. There is a subjective aspect to grading, and grades can change. A PCGS 63 today may be a 64 tomorrow. I'd give it another shot on those that didn't grade as you expected, in which case you do have a decision as far as submitting in the slab, or cracking out and submitting raw. If you don't have Coinfacts, you might sign up. It is very informative.
RAMPANT GRADEFLATION
Just post the certificate numbers and someone will link them.
Frustrated with the expense and inconsistency of third-party grading? That's just the reason I collect raw. Worried about losing money at the high end of the grading scale? That's just why I collect the lower grades. Concerned about taking financial punishment in the collection? That's just why I buy coins with disposable income I can afford to lose.
Just offering another perspective.. as usual.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>This concerns me because ALL 5 of them came with the labels from previously being graded by top tier tpgs, and some of them had auction pedigrees to boot. >>
A couple of points/questions on this:
-Can we see the original labels?
-How confident are you that they are in fact the same coins?
-Coins can change over the years, even more when they are raw.
- MS/PR 70 coins are worth more than MS/PR 69 coins. Sorry to state the obvious, and I think that was another thread
- crack out 35 PR/MS70 coins and send them in raw and see how many come back MS/PR ... LOL
I suspect 30 for 35 (your average with classics) is a way better average than you'll get with moderns, and while I know I have no empirical evidence to substantiate my point of view, other than my own experience, I believe that you'll do much worse in moderns.
It's all a game. As discussed here recently, just take a look at the $90,000 1927-S NGC-MS65FH quarter going to a PCGS-MS66FH holder and a roughly $90,000 coin then resold for about $260,000 a couple months later by the same auction house (Heritage in this case)! Same coin! I spoke to the underbidder on the NGC coin and he told me that if had not been bidding, the coin may have fetched only about $50,000 as it was down to (2) bidders from that point. This is how world class graders deal with these "discrepancies" as you describe them. One may consider learning to grade at a very high level in whatever series one chooses and then these "discrepancies" become your dear friend.
Wondercoin
-How confident are you that they are in fact the same coins?
-Coins can change over the years, even more when they are raw.
I'm on a new machine without any of the imaging software that I used to have, so I can't post pics of the labels until I get geared up. Most were OGH labels, one was NGC, and the other was ICG. I assume they are the same coins, but that question did cross my mind. I never paid much attention to the BN vs. RB designations because I was focused on the coin. Probably a mistake on my part.
If someone wants to link the cert numbers, here are two sweet coins that came back UNC Details, Genuine:
1835.93/31453149
1904.94/31453138
This one came back "Graffiti", Genuine - AU Details (and I have no argument with it):
1365.98/31461781
These two came back "Altered Surf" - AU Details and UNC Details, respectively. The coins are mostly a nice chocolate, in-hand:
1663.94/31453146
1681.94/31453147
Here is the formerly OGH MS-64RB:
1931.64/31453139
Mitch, your post actually makes me feel a little bit better. My opinions of these coins is still high, and I don't necessarily agree with the genuine designations given. I'm thinking that most copper guys would like the coins about as much as I do.
If someone could give me the method for linking an image from the PCGS files to here, I would do the legwork in posting some of the ones that DID grade. Thanks for all of your comments.
I knew it would happen.
Or the 2009 high relief that doesn't seem to be going down in price. Or any of the 2008 Buffaloes
My point is in 1955 people were saying I don't collect modern crap. Guess the guy that got the Lincoln double 55 was a fool to keep it.
I have a vast collection of classic and modern , just saying. Modern crap today will be someone's Classic in time.
As a collector and just occasional venturer to the other side of the table, I have sent in coins, done some resubmissions, and listened to, studied, and played the 'grading game'. I have no qualms with PCGS, and although I entered the hobby with seriousness AFTER the TPG startups, I am very aware of the part they played in ridding the hobby of the Wild West problem coin scene and rampant overgrading. I believe we are just in the middle of a new phase of the hobby, where a larger pre-1986 problem is replaced with a better scene, just carrying with it a small degree of inconsistency.
Yes, the situation bites us all a bit. I just received a group of 5 Type coins back from PCGS yesterday. 3 were precisely where I thought they would be and were my first submission on all three. The other two were resubmissions. One was a superbly rim-toned Lincoln that had previously been 91-ed for color. It was again. It is a shame, and my gut tells me it is gradeable, but PCGS was consistent, even with this problem. The other was a superb ANACS MS65 Morgan, cracked to get it into a more marketable holder (hence an advantage to me). It came back MS64 my first submission -- yet was earnestly sought after by every dealer who saw it in an MS64 holder. I resubmitted -- and it came back yesterday as an MS65, exactly as ANACS saw it in the days of alphanumeric holders. Sure, I have a slight twinge of regret that I had to dump another $30 into the coin to get it into the 'right' holder, but then again, I have also done well on many other submissions and I try to minimize my downside risk by submitting coins that I have skills in grading. Is one grade difference extreme? I argue 'no', it is within what I regard as normal for human skills. But sure, I wish they had agreed with myself and 15 other dealers that the coin was a killer 65 on the first go-round.
I enjoy the bump in value I get from PCGS graded coins. I enjoy the purely internal satisfaction I get when I submit and can nail the grade with a concurrent view from PCGS. I also like to re-examine coins I get back in a lower grade and see if I can spot what I missed the first time. I usually can, and once in a rare while I also see a mistake made in the other direction.
The game is fun for me overall. I am lucky -- my basic livelihood is not derived from the grading game, so I can afford to be a bit flippant. We all have PCGS graded coins that hit all over the grading map from high end of the grade down to those we know are not. Still, the overall benefit to the hobby is inescapable.
As for Modern Bullion and the 69/70 game -- I hope I have not avoided the OP topic -- I just do not find the coins in that area to be personally interesting. But as for the corollary points on grading, thanks for the opportunity to post . . .
Drunner
<< <i>If someone wants to link the cert numbers, here are two sweet coins that came back UNC Details, Genuine: >>
<< <i>This one came back "Graffiti", Genuine - AU Details (and I have no argument with it): >>
<< <i>These two came back "Altered Surf" - AU Details and UNC Details, respectively. The coins are mostly a nice chocolate, in-hand: >>
<< <i>Here is the formerly OGH MS-64RB: >>
Here are your coins-
I thought this one (above) might be a planchet flaw before seeing the notation by PCGS.
I thought this one (above) looked like altered surfaces before seeing the notation by PCGS.
I would not pay RB money for this coin (above) as it has far too much BN on it.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
I had lots of fun collecting and I learned a lot about history, economics, metals, politics, geography, etc. I collected what I liked and stayed away from things I wasn't sure about. I hoped to make some money or at least break even in the long run and I have done pretty well with that.
It's kind of like cars. I always wanted a Lamborghini but I had a lot of fun with a pickup truck and it was a whole lot less stressful. And I got to where I needed to go. And the pickups are easy to sell when you want a different one.
I see the phrase on here a lot, "Only buy the best!" but that would eliminate about 99% of collectors. I am not sure there is a $$$ correlation between owning the best classic coins and the best moderns.
Like everything else in life my motto for collecting is "Have fun". Make a buck, lose a buck? Let the dealers worry about that.
PS: I have still never had a slab in my hand........ sorry PCGS
Successful BST deals with mustangt and jesbroken. Now EVERYTHING is for sale.
The 1857 could go either BN or RB, though I would have thought it might barely make RB. On a coin with that kind of eye appeal, buyers won't give a crap about slab grade or price guide. Price it as an RB, and it will sell to the the first person that looks at it. You did not take a 50% beating here.
By the way- GREAT eye for early copper you have! Now where are all the True Views of the ones that graded so we can salivate?
<< <i> Anyone who thinks grading isn't all over the map based on numerous factors just hasn't done it enough. >>
It's not "grading" that's allover the map so much as it's pricing. If each of a coin's
attributes were graded there woulfd be far less variability. Pricing would become
more difficult.
Obviously some coins are not worth the cost to have regraded. But for those that are, do it. I don't think it is necessary to use a different TPG, either.
Lance.
I do not disagree with PCGS' opinions of these 6 coins as they apprear to me to be consistent with their grading policies; I do continue to object to the simple notation "genuine" and believe that for your grading fee, you're entitled to A. a verbal description, in clear language of a sentence or two, what's "wrong" with the coins, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY B: an expert opinion of a "NET" grade that the secondary market for coins will respect and upon which collectors can value and make a market in the coins.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Classic Silver coins is where I have had my most enjoyment. The grading tends to be more straight forward for me to understand and frequently agree with.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
I don't believe either of the two top TPGs can grade copper. Period.
The 1857 could go either BN or RB on any subsequent submission. But whether it's 4%, 5%, or 10% RED makes no big difference in the actual coin. It will still look generally brown. On the MS64 $10 Lib I mentioned above. That coin was purchased by me at a Heritage auction with the intent to crack out for a 65 shot. The coin was devoid of marks and ultra clean. So the consecutive Body Bags "altered surfaces" on the next 2 tries were shockers. At that point I was ready to take my lumps and suffer a 30% loss (paid $2500 and willing to take $1850). I showed the coin to several major gold dealers who couldn't tell me what was wrong with the coin. But they felt something wasn't right. And since I told them up front it had BB'd, they were already looking for something wrong with it. One of them offered me $1500 (less than MS63 money) which was not going to happen. The coin was shipped off raw to a major auction house hoping it might be bid up to 64 or better money. The persons pre-screening the coin loved it and decided to resubmit it before the auction. It came back MS66. A $1,000 loss turned into a $2500 profit. The lesson? Sometimes the "losers" end up turning out just fine. In my case I was lucky someone else saw what I saw even though I had already tossed in the white towel.
As a side note, I wish I had $10 for every "pq" toned seated coin I had cracked out over the years looking for an upgrade....only to get back an AT'd designation....usually from the same service. It's crazy to even think that most coins will come back the same grade time after time. That's just not reality. If you expect that, then you either have to have world class grading chops.....or another hobby.
<< <i>Well it just sounds like there's 6 cents that you need to send through a second time. >>
This is why its BS, I had to do that to get a grade before. That is to much subjectivity to go from gennies to graded just cause you sent it back through. A few points here or there is one thing, A bunch of kids eating red vines, spending 10 seconds on something that is not there problem in the end is another.
type2,CCHunter.
<< <i>Seems to me that based on your sample of +35 large cents where 30 came back "with flying colors" and another lot came back with 5 genuine and 2 of which you didnt expect to straight grade. You have done fairly well. So really 3-5 of 35 came back below your expectations?
You are also making the assumption that the first grade that they received was the "right" grade and that the coins have not changed over time. Not really surprised that an MS64RD could go to a MS64BN. I wouldn't be so quick to place blame on the TPG's if you are in the habit of cracking out coins and then try to reholder them expecting the exact same result after one submission. >>
Ditto!
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
<< <i>Authenticity is all that matters when it comes to collecting coins. Mr. Dansco don't care how dirty they are. >>
Not true at all. Get any price guide and you'll see that grade has a major impact on value.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.